Australia v England, 11 June

First topic message reminder :

      
AUSTRALIA v ENGLAND
11 June 2016
20:00 AEST (UTC+10)
Suncorp Stadium, Brisbane

Live on [tbc]

Referee: Romain Poite (France)
Touch judges: [tbc]
Television match official: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

44 Played 44
25 Won 18
1 Drawn 1
18 Lost 25
940 Points 674

B. Recent Form

3 October 2015 - Twickenham, London: 13 – 33 to Australia

29 November 2014 - Twickenham, London: 26 – 17 to England

2 November 2013 - Twickenham, London: 20 – 13 to England

17 November 2012 - Twickenham, London: 14 – 20 to Australia

13 November 2010 - Twickenham, London: 35 – 18 to England

19 June 2010 - Telstra Stadium, Sydney: 20 – 21 to England

12 June 2010 - Subiaco Oval, Perth: 27 – 17 to Australia

C. Teams

AUSTRALIA 

Israel Folau; Dane Haylett-Petty, Tevita Kuridrani, Samu Kerevi, Rob Horne; Bernard Foley, Nick Phipps; Scott Sio, Stephen Moore (captain), Greg Holmes, Rory Arnold, Rob Simmons, Scott Fardy, Michael Hooper, David Pocock.

Replacements: Tatafu Polota-Nau, James Slipper, Sekope Kepu, James Horwill, Dean Mumm, Sean McMahon, Nick Frisby, Christian Lealiifano

ENGLAND

15. Mike Brown; 14. Anthony Watson, 13. Jonathan Joseph, 12. Luther Burrell, 11. Marland Yarde; 10. Owen Farrell, 9. Ben Youngs; 1. Mako Vunipola, 2. Dylan Hartley, 3. Dan Cole, 4. Maro Itoje, 5. George Kruis, 6. Chris Robshaw, 7. James Haskell, 8. Billy Vunipola.

Replacements: 16. Luke Cowan-Dickie, 17. Matt Mullan, 18. Paul Hill, 19. Joe Launchbury, 20. Courtney Lawes, 21. Danny Care, 22. George Ford, 23. Jack Nowell.

The guy whose been playing loosehead for Brumbies while Sio was injured looked pretty good, but agree that Sio/Slipper are a pretty good pair

I thought Houston was supposedly in the squad...or was that wrong.

Hazel Sapling wrote:If Nick Skelton is fit, I would be surprised to see Oz without him. Great at destroying mauls, powerful in the scrum and at carrying. Worst case is he benches from my point of view.

I'd love to see British showjumping legend Nick Skelton doing all that, but I'm not sure he's eligible. Australia might have to settle for Will Skelton (/smarta*s*)

Main worry Wallaby fans have for him is his weakness in the lineout. The view is he can't jump, and seems impossible to lift. That makes the Pocock/Hooper combination tougher to field because of the lack of options.

GeordieFalcon wrote:I thought Houston was supposedly in the squad...or was that wrong.

He's been dropped, they've cut it by 6 or 7

Rugby Fan wrote:

Hazel Sapling wrote:If Nick Skelton is fit, I would be surprised to see Oz without him. Great at destroying mauls, powerful in the scrum and at carrying. Worst case is he benches from my point of view.

I'd love to see British showjumping legend Nick Skelton doing all that, but I'm not sure he's eligible. Australia might have to settle for Will Skelton (/smarta*s*)

Main worry Wallaby fans have for him is his weakness in the lineout. The view is he can't jump, and seems impossible to lift. That makes the Pocock/Hooper combination tougher to field because of the lack of options.

Vardy is in the back row so that should be 2 jumpers (with the other lock) and Hooper can be put in the air. Will Skelton is only 140kg so really there are no excuses for not lifting him....

Should use him as a lifter, reckon he could single lift a back row jumper and makes it difficult to read too

BamBam wrote:Should use him as a lifter, reckon he could single lift a back row jumper and makes it difficult to read too

Lions tour AWJ lifting Croft. Altitude sickness was a major concern

Hazel Sapling wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

Hazel Sapling wrote:If Nick Skelton is fit, I would be surprised to see Oz without him. Great at destroying mauls, powerful in the scrum and at carrying. Worst case is he benches from my point of view.

I'd love to see British showjumping legend Nick Skelton doing all that, but I'm not sure he's eligible. Australia might have to settle for Will Skelton (/smarta*s*)

Main worry Wallaby fans have for him is his weakness in the lineout. The view is he can't jump, and seems impossible to lift. That makes the Pocock/Hooper combination tougher to field because of the lack of options.

Vardy is in the back row so that should be 2 jumpers (with the other lock) and Hooper can be put in the air. Will Skelton is only 140kg so really there are no excuses for not lifting him....

Vardy will be playing in the Euro football comp.....Australia will have to settle for Fardy?

This is what happens when you type rapidly at work and don't give proper care and attention to 606v2 ....admittedly Vardy and Nick Skelton would probably make good jumpers

got the t-shirt for that one ....

Fern Cotton Is Scotland coach still right?

Are you not getting confused with Dot....

hugehandoff wrote:I would prefer

Mako
George
Cole
Kruis
Launchbury
Itoje
Billy
Haskell
Care
Farrell
Watson
Burrell
JJ
Nowell
Goode

Bench: Mullan, Hartley, Hill, Clifford, Robshaw, Youngs, Slade, Brown

Enables Eng to attack the lineouts. Removes Ford from the firing line. Whilst it will never happen I also think Hartley needs more game time and George would actually be a better starting no.2. Itoje obviously provides 2nd row cover and might move there if required.

I'd be happy with that, except I'd have Daly ahead of JJ, but I think GF's side is more likely to play the first test.

Given Te'o was in the original squad and Burrell is an injury replacement it would be surprising to see Burrell move ahead of Te'o. Given what a problem IC has been for England it is interesting there are 4 credible options in the squad to play the position (5 if you include Daly!).

I can't believe anyone is suggesting Nowell might be dropped - I reckon he's the first outside back on the teamsheet.

DaveM wrote:

hugehandoff wrote:I would prefer

Mako
George
Cole
Kruis
Launchbury
Itoje
Billy
Haskell
Care
Farrell
Watson
Burrell
JJ
Nowell
Goode

Bench: Mullan, Hartley, Hill, Clifford, Robshaw, Youngs, Slade, Brown

Enables Eng to attack the lineouts. Removes Ford from the firing line. Whilst it will never happen I also think Hartley needs more game time and George would actually be a better starting no.2. Itoje obviously provides 2nd row cover and might move there if required.

I'd be happy with that, except I'd have Daly ahead of JJ, but I think GF's side is more likely to play the first test.

Given Te'o was in the original squad and Burrell is an injury replacement it would be surprising to see Burrell move ahead of Te'o. Given what a problem IC has been for England it is interesting there are 4 credible options in the squad to play the position (5 if you include Daly!).

I can't believe anyone is suggesting Nowell might be dropped - I reckon he's the first outside back on the teamsheet.

Despite EJs support for Ford post Eng/Wales. I agree re Teo & think it will be Farrell at 10 & Teo at 12 with Ford on the bench.
Also Hask to start with Clifford on the bench.

Come the Autumn with Hughes & possibly Underhill coming into the equation the back row should have a very different look about it. There will be many options to ponder with Itoje also able to play 6 & Launch starting. Exciting times ahead I feel.

Te'o is very much an unkown element. It is obvious that Jones likes the look of him, and that he wants to have the option to select either a playmaker or a bosher at 12. That te'o was named in the squad first will work in his favour, however Jones has now seen burrell in the squad for a week or so while Te'o will have trained with the rest of the players for the first time when they landed in Oz.

I can easily see ford at 10 and Farrell at 12 again, with a bosher on the bench.

I think I missed this but, how does Te'o qualify?

Parent.

Who has seen Te'o play? We are not going down Burgess avenue again, are we?

By all accounts he was very poor in the Rabo final.

I actually watched the second half of that game and didn't realise he was in it, looking back on it later he was made to look a little silly by his opposite number.

Other then that from the Leinster thread he's been a bit muh, adds a solid presence but hardly sets the world alight.

Tbh I'd just as soon have Farrell/Slade at 12 but I don't mind seeing all of them play there across the tour.

Might be bluster from Steve James
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/06/04/eddie-jones-ready-to-hand-ben-teo-a-shock-england-debut-in-first/

I agree I would like to see different combinations in this tour. And perhaps that is what Eddie will do.

doctor_grey wrote:Who has seen Te'o play?  We are not going down Burgess avenue again, are we?  

He hasn't been pulling up trees in the league exactly. He would be a good stop-gap but long-term I don't see him as an international centre. I can't see any reason why Jones and Chieka almost had a tug of war over him as he's certainly no Sonny Bill.

Leinster in current form wasn't a good tester of his ability. England, if used, probably will. He has promise... but needed a more cutting edge game than Leinster were offering this season.

yappysnap wrote:By all accounts he was very poor in the Rabo final.

I actually watched the second half of that game and didn't realise he was in it, looking back on it later he was made to look a little silly by his opposite number.

Other then that from the Leinster thread he's been a bit muh, adds a solid presence but hardly sets the world alight.

Tbh I'd just as soon have Farrell/Slade at 12 but I don't mind seeing all of them play there across the tour.

Aki opposite him has been immense all season though!

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:Might be bluster from Steve James
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/06/04/eddie-jones-ready-to-hand-ben-teo-a-shock-england-debut-in-first/

If this was Lancaster in charge i would believe this was true.

But the six nations selections of the Squad and 23, and the Squad for the summer tour has convinced me that the journo's have no credible "Leak" in Eddie's camp yet.

yappysnap wrote:By all accounts he was very poor in the Rabo final.

I actually watched the second half of that game and didn't realise he was in it, looking back on it later he was made to look a little silly by his opposite number.

Other then that from the Leinster thread he's been a bit muh, adds a solid presence but hardly sets the world alight.

Tbh I'd just as soon have Farrell/Slade at 12 but I don't mind seeing all of them play there across the tour.

If you only watched the Rabo final, then you probably wouldn't have been too impressed. However, if you had also watched the rest of the season, then you would realise that he was probably Leinster's best player in a backline that was not the most creative as a whole. If Te'o was playing for Glasgow, Connacht or Ulster he would probably have finished the league's top scorer.

I would wager he will already give England more than Hape or Burgess. He's certainly looked at home in the centre.

Ben Youngs praises the new England fitness regime.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/06/05/brutal-england-training-regime-has-made-me-fighting-fit-to-take/

I appreciate there's a lot of planning behind these kinds of schedules but it seems odd to hear a professional sportsman saying how amazing it is that he's become fit to play, as if the idea had never occurred to him, or anyone around him, before.

Australian rugby site Green and Gold did a joint podcast with the Eggchasers.

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/podcast-special-with-the-eggchasers/

If you don't have a spare 40 minutes to listen, the Australian boys hope England try to smash it up, because they believe their pack can absorb the threat, while slowing down, or stealing our ball.

They also think their scrum can be more than competitive, and are looking for referees to spot any illegal tactics from England.

Matt Rowley is worried about Ben Youngs, which the Eggchasers just couldn't believe. It's fair to say there was a large gulf in thinking about his abilities.

Green & Gold are aware that we have some swift and elusive backs, and even think we might outgun the Wallabies on the count. That's one reason they hope England keep the ball in the pack. They are looking forward to seeing Robshaw and Haskell again since they don't think that combination amounts to much.

Seems Te'o had to sit out training on Monday.

Not sure how wise it would be to hand a starting debut to a player who has never played with or against his team-mates, and has had virtually no time to train with them.

We'll see.

I think England will cruise this series. Just a better side in my opinion.

eirebilly wrote:I think England will cruise this series. Just a better side in my opinion.

Perhaps...but at the moment it's theory.

What Australia have is Home (not to be sniffed at) and - in my opinion - the better coach in Cheika. Never under-estimate a Cheika team.

I don't rate Australia's backs that much without Giteau and AAC. Their pack however has come on leaps and bounds.

eirebilly wrote:I think England will cruise this series. Just a better side in my opinion.

GeordieFalcon wrote:

eirebilly wrote:I think England will cruise this series. Just a better side in my opinion.

Why the shock? Australia (even under Cheika) are not as good a side as many think. England, under Jones, look very well coached and solid side.
I honestly believe that England will win all three (or lose the last test after winning the series) relatively comfortably.

They were pretty neat at the last World Cup.... Top three ranked side is what it says on the tin.

Not convincing to me Fly. Scotland had their measure in the RWC. Attack Australia in the backline and they look poor. England have a very decent tight 5 and a very strong backline, certainly enough to beat the Aussies.

They cantered past us in the World Cup. Now I don't believe the World Cup was actually a fair reflection of where we were as a team...however the results are what they are.

We have also improved a little under Eddie.

However...its Australia in Australia.

So I just cant agree with us cruising past them.

I think most commentators would have England down as having as good a chance as they ever do of getting a positive result from this tour but confidently predicting a whitewash is putting your neck out there a bit.

Theyve only ever won 3 games in Aus, and two of those were by the 2003 side. It would take a major tip in the historical as well as recent balance of power to have england down as favourites.

The results they got last time they visited didnt really get the credit they desreved, and they wont have the same ability to completely shut down games through scrum penalties.

Better side or not, 3-0 would be a pretty epic result.

I honestly think it'll be 3-0 to Australia or 2-1

Lancaster laid the foundations of a very good England side but Jones is realising this. Very very good side is England with some players that would walk into any international team. Australia, in my opinion, had a decent RWC but are not a very good side. England simply a better team in my opinion.

We have a really good chance of walking away with a series win. can't see 3 0 either way. A lot depends on how we turn up to that first test. I can see our scrum being on top again, expect our lineout to be really strong and to disrupt theirs. A lot on our midfield again. And how much has that area been improved by Jones and Ella since the 6 nations?

eirebilly wrote:Australia, in my opinion, had a decent RWC but are not a very good side.

Getting to the final is only 'decent'?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

eirebilly wrote:Australia, in my opinion, had a decent RWC but are not a very good side.

Getting to the final is only 'decent'?

Decent in performances, excellent in results. Is that better Lucky?

Better But they produced some better-than-decent performances, too.

I think that they lived a charmed life in many games Lucky. The only good games they had was against England and the AB's in the final. The rest, they were pretty average. Hell, should have even lost out to Scotland.

I agree they weren't consistently good. But the All Blacks weren't consistently good, either.

Still think England are better than Australia. 0-3 or 1-2 series win for them but I predict a 0-3 series win and comfortable at that.

It should be more a more competitive series than New Zealand versus Wales.

You're gonna make a ton of money, billy.

Good man.... be nice to people with the tips when you pocket it.

eirebilly wrote:I think that they lived a charmed life in many games Lucky. The only good games they had was against England and the AB's in the final. The rest, they were pretty average. Hell, should have even lost out to Scotland.

...But didn't. Now there's a trick that comes in handy

England on the other hand, shouldn't have lost to Wales...but did.